On 09/07/2010 14:04, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Have you tried using composition?
Thanks fro feedback Steve.
No, NO Chance.
The composite pattern requires inheritances (and the use of the
composite pattern does not makes sense in our case) but also my
idea of using the decorator patter
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I wish there was a way to optionally make the class final (i.e. make it
a parameter).
I first thought this to work:
template bar( bool b ) {
mixin( b ? "final:" : "" );
class bar {
}
}
static assert( msg, __traits( isFinalClass, bar!true ) );
static a
On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 19:38:59 -0400, BLS wrote:
1) std.collections classes , as well as Steven's dcollections are
final.. This keeps me away from sub classing and mixin a Publisher
template.
Have you tried using composition?
The classes in dcollections are final for performance reasons. O
On 09/07/2010 01:04, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I think Observer is a very difficult pattern to make generic. There's
very much variability. Here's an article I wrote about it:
http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://erdani.com/publications/cuj-2005-04.pdf
http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=ht
On 09/07/2010 01:04, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I think Observer is a very difficult pattern to make generic. There's
very much variability. Here's an article I wrote about it:
http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://erdani.com/publications/cuj-2005-04.pdf
http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=ht
On 09/07/2010 01:04, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I think Observer is a very difficult pattern to make generic. There's
very much variability. Here's an article I wrote about it:
http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://erdani.com/publications/cuj-2005-04.pdf
http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=ht
On 08/07/2010 23:37, Sean Kelly wrote:
BLS Wrote:
Would it makes sense to use the std.concurrency message passing system
for OO patterns that require message passing ?
I think so. It's certainly safer than the traditional callback method, and
seems best to standardize on one form of noti
On 07/08/2010 10:26 AM, BLS wrote:
Hi,
Unfortunately Andrei has canceled his efforts on std.pattern.
Despite that I would like to hear your opinion regarding std.patterns in
general, I have a concrete problem in implementing patterns (like GOF
stuff) with the help of mixin templates..
A concret
BLS Wrote:
>
> Would it makes sense to use the std.concurrency message passing system
> for OO patterns that require message passing ?
I think so. It's certainly safer than the traditional callback method, and
seems best to standardize on one form of notification if at all practical to do
so
Hi,
Unfortunately Andrei has canceled his efforts on std.pattern.
Despite that I would like to hear your opinion regarding std.patterns in
general, I have a concrete problem in implementing patterns (like GOF
stuff) with the help of mixin templates..
A concrete example (atm. an evolving idea
10 matches
Mail list logo
